Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID:	<3D591779.6030906@hekimian.com>
Date:	Tue, 13 Aug 2002 10:28:09 -0400
X-Sybari-Trust:	da556f80 b923d9bf 4738785c 00000109
From:	Joe Buehler <jbuehler AT hekimian DOT com>
Reply-To:	joseph DOT buehler AT spirentcom DOT com
Organization:	Spirent Communications
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; WinNT4.0; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020530
X-Accept-Language:	en-us, en
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	Robert Collins <rbcollins AT cygwin DOT com>
CC:	Cygwin Developers <cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject:	Re: vfork / setsid interaction
References:	<1029248291 DOT 12157 DOT 96 DOT camel AT lifelesswks>

Robert Collins wrote:

> IIRC According to SUSv2, calling *anything* after [v]fork() other than
> exec() may lead to unexpected behaviour. 
> 
> You might like to reference the SUSv2 and see what the expected
> behaviour is.

Granted, but compatibility with historical UNIX behavior makes it
easier to port things.

Joe Buehler

- Raw text -